Is Jesus God?

We have been debating here whether Jesus is God. Some posters will never accept that Jesus is God. The trading of passages and appealing to scholars will be endless.I will suggest WHY the incarnation of God into man is a problem for many religious minded people. It is because their religious concept has no revelation of God being processed to be "eaten". They have no revelation of God going through steps to be able to impart Himself into man as "food".In the book The Subjective Truths in the Holy Scriptures Witness Lee writes: If we read carefully John chapter 6 we see eventually Jesus is speaking of taking in the Spirit as eating His flesh and drinking His blood, "Does this stumble you? Then what if you saw the Son of Man ascending to where He was before?

​

It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words which I have spoken to you are spirit and are life." (John 6:62,63)We must receive the Spirit to eat Jesus. The last Adam became a life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45). And it is the Spirit that gives the divine life. To eat Jesus we have to take in His words without resistance and we must receive the Holy Spirit embodied in those living words.I am saying that the Triune God has passed through a process economically that the the Son of God not only shed His blood for the sinner's redemption, but was roasted under the divine judgment, resurrected to become a life giving Spirit that He might enter into man as man's food. This is that we may live by Him. As He lived by His Father if we eat Jesus we also will live because of Him. "As the living Father has sent Me and I live because of the Father, so he who eats Me, he also shall live because of Me." (John 6:57) I said before that in the Bible we cannot separate what the Triune God is from what the Triune God is doing. The Triune God is not that man may have a puzzling doctrine. The Trinity is God performing His operation of dispensing God as divine and eternal life into man that man may "eat" God and live out God.It is likely that objectors will fall back into debating the objective worship of Who God is. They will argue that Jesus is not God. They will argue that Paul never taught the doctrine of the Trinity, so on and so forth. I expect that some will only notice that I somewhat made lightly of bowing to worship God. They may object that God is to be reverenced. They may be right but in a shortsighted way. God is meant to be "eaten".In this post I have tried to tie the matter of the Triune God into His plan to dispense Himself into man. Never forget these two "becomings" of God - " ... the Word BECAME flesh" (John 1:14)
" ... the last Adam BECAME a life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 15:45)These becomings reveal the Triune God's plan to dispense Himself as life into His redeemed and justified people that God and man might be united and mingled together for God's expression and His people's enjoyment.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

A simple question:
Exodus 7:1 1 And the LORD said unto Moses, See, I have made thee elohiym to Pharaoh: and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet.
Moses is clearly called elohiym, which is god. God made Moses this way.
Is Moses god? Yes or no? Sigh.... Another rant, another non-answer. Its a simple question. Actually, if you wish to be taken seriously: stop jumping to conclusions, stop creating strawman arguments, stop avoiding questions and stop the insults.Case in point: My question has nothing to do with Hebrews as you assumed. My question has nothing to do with "if' god can be created. All I did was take scripture and ask YOU what it meant. Thats it.Its an actual quote from the Bible. I'm asking you to tell me what it means. Why is that so difficult?The scripture Trinitarians use in the gospels is so flimsy (except John 1:1), that its very damning that the High Priest and the Council would have easily brought up the fact Jesus claimed to be god...if thats what he did. They wanted evidence to put Jesus to death. Claiming to be god is a major offense. Yet they didnt make the claim, the actual witnesses to Jesus didnt make the claim nor did the false witnesses make the claim.So I asked (now for the fourth time) why is that? Does it make more sense that Jesus never claimed to be god hence why they didnt use that as evidence or that he did claim to be god, but they decided not to mention it?I also asked why the blind man is not god since he also claimed "I am"? You are adamant that since Jesus in John 8, said "I am", it MUST refer back to Exodus. You refuse to accept any other possibility. This is a perfect example of context.First, it makes no sense to state "Before Abraham, god" to answer the question how he new him, since Abraham existed 2000 years earlier. It makes perfect sense to claim "Before Abraham, I existed".I'm going to throw on a fourth question. If Jesus was divine, the messiah, the son of god, but NOT god himself, how would this change anything regarding salvation?

No. I do not think either that Jesus is God incarnate is wrong nor that the history will conclude with God and man mingled together to match Christ as His "Bride" and has God's "temple" is wrong.At least one part of my being is God already. "He who is joined to the Lord is one spirit" (1 Cor. 6:17).Here two spirits are involved - the created human spirit and the uncreated eternal Holy Spirit. Because I have been redeemed by the blood of Jesus my human spirit has been joined to the Spirit which is God Himself. The two have become in me "one spirit" . One part of by being is God. Or I can say one part of my being is joined and mingled with God.The two spirits are no longer separated. Within me they have become "one spirit" according to 1 Cor 6:17.Now consider that fallen man was not only alienated from knowing God. Fallen man was alienated from the life of God (Eph. 4:18).We must ask if the life of God is God? What could be more subjective to a person than the life of that person? The life of God is surely God Himself. And man after being excluded from partaking of the tree of life was ever after "alienated from the life of God". This proves that God not only desires to be worshipped. God desires to be LIVED.Actually, the true worship of God is to live God. That is to live out God. That is to allow God to live through us and for us to really live God.So man, in the fall of Adam, was "alienated from the life of God". Especially the Gospel of John is about God coming to us in Christ to end this alienation from the life of God. In Him was life. And the life was the light of men. Christ the bread of life. Bread is to be eaten. Bread goes through a process of preparation that it could be eaten.Christ in John's gospel is the bread of life. In Him is life. He is the resurrection and the life. He is the way, the truth, and the life. In His resurrection He says that because He lives we also shall live. This live is to live God. This live via His resurrection is for God as life to be dispensed into man.Now I said that my regenerated spirit is"one spirit" with the Holy Spirit. Now I also said that one part of my being is God because of this joining, this mingling of the divine Spirit with my regenerated human spirit.Now, I am no longer "alienated from the life of God". Rather my regenerated human spirit IS life. My human spirit is the life of God. Do not scoff. Listen to Romans 8:10 - "... the spirit is life because of righteousness ".Righteousness has been imputed to me through the Christ being imparted into me. My human spirit is divine life because of righteousness. The spirit of the man or woman who has been born again, is life, the life of God, because of righteousness.Rather than being alienated from the life of God because of unrigheousness, my human spirit has become mingled with God the Spirit because of righteousness.Paul can say that for him to live is Christ. He can say when Christ our life shall appear then we Christians shall also appear with Him in glory.John 17 speaks of the believers being perfected into one. The beginning of this perfecting is in our being born of God that our spirit may be divine life because of righteousness. Then God will spread into our soul and into our body to saturate the redeemed. This requires PERFECTING.This calls for arriving and the oneness of the faith and of the full knowledge of the Son of God as Ephesians speaks. God wants to express Himself in man.Do not think God only want to express Himself as the mighty fire on the top of Mount Sinai. He was there for 40 days and the Hebrews got tired of it. They made an idol and called it their god. They expected their new idol god to lead them back to Egypt.God desires to dispense Himself into man as life. That is that the school boy, the office worker, the house wife, the executive, the mechanic, the secratary, the prisoner in jail, the boss, the employee, the man or woman doing mundane things around the home may live Christ and express God in man.Our God is the man Jesus. That is clear. And this process of perfecting into oneness with one another and with the Father and the Son through the Holy Spirit will consummate in a marriage.The "city" of New Jerusalem becomes the Wife of Christ. She matches Christ. She is perfected into a counterpart of Christ. She is Mrs. Jesus Christ. She is Mrs. God in a sense very real.You did not notice? God brought the rib out of Adam. HE built it up into a woman. He brought the woman to the man and the two became one flesh.This is not simply a story about the marriage of Adam and Eve. This is a window into the eternal purpose of God. Out of one He made two. Then He brought the two together to be one. This is a window into the entire divine revelation of the Bible. And the Bible concludes in Revelation 21 and 22 with God in Christ marrying a city, New Jerusalem. They are the sons of God. They are corporately the temple of God. And they match Christ to marry Christ. And Christ is the mingling of God and man.Here in the city, man is brought back to "the tree of life". He is has regained the right to eat of the tree of life. This means for eternity God dispenses Himself into man. "Blessed are those who wash their robes that they might have right to the tree of life and may enter into the gates into the city." (Rev. 22:14) The life if God Himself in His communicable attributes and divine nature and expression.The mingling of the numbers 4 and 3 is seen in New Jerusalem. For example, there are three gates on the four sides of the city. This makes 12 gates. This is not the 7 we see in earlier chapters. This is not the addition of 3 and 4. This is the multiplication of 3 and 4. This multiplication represents a mingling.The number 3 symbolizes the Triune God. The number 4 symbolizes the creature of God's creation, especially man. Earlier we see many 7s. There are 7 lamps. There are 7 seals. There are 7 Spirits of God. There are 7 trumpets. There are 7 bowls. These sevens involve the unique God symbolized by 1 bringing His creation, symbolized by 6, to Himself. It is also the Triune God, 3, adding to Himself His created man, 4.But the number 12 is a number of perfection in eternity. This is not the addition of 3 plus 4 but the mingling of 3 times 4. This is why we see four sides of the city opened to the four directions of the earth, each with three gates. The meaning is the mingling of God and man.The Spirit of God and the Bride of the Lamb are so mingled together that they speak as one - "And the Spirit and the bride say, Come! And let him who hears say, Come! And let him who is thirsty come; let him who wills take the water of life freely." (Rev. 22:17) You would expect that at a wedding it would say that the Bride and the Bridegroom would say "Come!". This invitation is from the Spirit and the Bride. The Bridegroom Jesus Christ, has become the life giving Spirit. And as the life giving Spirit the Bridegroom has been imparted into the Bride. So the oneness of the Bride and her Bridegroom, Christ, Who is the Spirit causes the Spirit and the Bride to speak as one: "The Spirit and the Bride say Come!".God and man are mingled for eternity. But Christ as God and having the Godhead is the Head of this marriage. The Bride is the Body of this Person and she is under the Head. Yet she is mingled and united with the Head.No one said that the Bible was always easy to understand. But these signs are expressing a profound reality that is taught in plainer words throughout the Bible. The Bridegroom, the Son of God, the Son of Man, became a life giving Spirit. And as this life giving Spirit He is a "drink" - the water of life. He is the river of the water of divine life to flow into the city of God to mingle God and man together for His eternal administration. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

I don't feel to say more about John 8:58. Let's just wait and see. Maybe we're wrong. Let's just wait and see what it meant for Jesus to say "Before Abraham came into being, I AM."Now this question afterwards I find a little interesting.I would ask you, HOW did God get into the believers then if receiving Christ was not recieving God ?I would also ask you , WHY is it necessary, if God is in the believers, to also have Christ in the believers ?I know that God is in the believers because "there is one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and IN all." (Eph. 4:6)The "all" here is not all the world. But it is all the members of the Body of Christ. So if God is in all, if the Father is in all, how did He get into all the members of Christ's Body ? Where are we told that God enters into the believers ?Furthermore, if Christ is in the constituents of His Body, why? Is it not enough for God the Father to be in all ? But Paul says that we should test ourselves to see if we are in the faith and that if Jesus Christ is in us.Why is there a need for Jesus Christ to be in us if God the Father is in us ?The truth is that Jesus and His Father as the Divine "WE" came together to make an abode with the lovers of Jesus (John 14:23)And furthermore, Romans 8:9-11 use these terms interchangeably:The Spirit of God
The Spirit of Christ
Christ
The Spirit of the One who raised Jesus from the deadThe One who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in the believers. But His title is interhangeable with the Spirit of Christ. And it is further interchangeable with Christ Himself - "and if Christ be in you ..."
So the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit has been dispensed into the believers. And this is salvation.Where does it say Michael the angel will come to live in the Christians ? If you Heretic are not also a JW, then you may ignore that question.However, the Father is in the believers and Christ is in the believers and the Holy Spirit is in the believers, according to the Bible. And we can detect NO DISCERNABLE DIFFERENCE.So "Triune" - "Three-one" is a useful expression to discriibe this mysterious indwelling God. He is three-one. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

im sorry jaywill.I am obviously far too simple minded to comprehend your theology because i just do not get it.

Understood.

Jay,I've asked Ema a few times to no avail. I asked you once but I guess you missed it.If Jesus was walking around claiming to be god, why didnt the High Priest and the Council accuse him of this?To state one is god, is a huge offense. The High Priest and Council were looking for evidence against Jesus.All they had to do was claim he made such a statement. They never did.All the witnesses brought forth should have made this statement. They never did.Even false witnesses were brought forth. They never did.If Jesus was claiming to be god, why was it never mentioned?Even at the trial before the High Priest and Council..he is called the "son of god", the "messiah", but never god.Why?

Exactly The loops and hurdles that must be traversed to come to this "self-evident" fact that Jesus is God is hilarious. Similarly for the trinity. Of course you can extract both concepts with suitable reading, interpretation, and self-delusion - I did for over twenty years - but if God really thinks that these are essential truths of his salvation, "clearly" revealed in the Bible, he's one twisted bastard. The more I look back at this, the more sense I see in the JW interpretation, as it at least makes a more honest take on the Gospels than standard evangelical protestantism.Not that I'm any comfort, as I think the JWs are just as deluded as the rest of Christedom, but at least I'm equally opportunities when it comes to my casting aspersions of delusion

You cant be serious, nobody is that stupid. No offence intended. If I ask you do the words, "I make", "Like" and "as" God to pharoah, make a diiference to the meaning of the passage, do you not see that I am answering your question in the negative.Noooooooooooooooo, God is not saying Moses is actually God, he is saying you will appear "AS God to Pharoah, because IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII, give you these signs and wonders.You have still avoided my original challenge to produce a man or angel that ascribes all the characteistics to them of deity, that are ascribed to Christ in the NT, not simply Jesus own words, even while those would be sufficientIll accept your inability to do this as a failure on your part, while I am still waiting I am glad that you see John 1:1 as clear cut example of Jesus deity, thank you.Further, Jesus refered to himself as the Son of Man, the Son of God and the IAM at different times, when beign charged as being equal with God, he used all three in response to the clear charge of or making himself equal with God.Why do you refuse to acknowledge only two of these usages and reject the other. We acknowledge all three, the Jews acknowledged all three when they were used and in ALL instances wanted to stone or kill him when used all or one of them at any given time.Your method of accepting two and rejecting the other is obvious because you have a doctrine to tout.If he said, in response to, "Only God may forgive sins', he replied, "Which is it easier to do tell the man to take up his bed and walk or thy sins are forgiven thee, BUT that you may know that the son of man has power to forgive sins here or earth"Or if he said, "You call me a blasphemere, becuase I say Iam the Son of God"Or if he said, "before Abraham was, IAM"Why is there a NEED on your part to change the third into something you want it to be, instead of what it clearly sayshere is the point, Jesus WAS accused of making himself equal to God by his ACCUSERS, Yes or No? if he was, it is of no consequence where the accusation was formulated or when or where it was brought up, even if not at his trialWill you deny that they accused him of making himself equal with God at all. Will you deny that in each instance Jesus uses one of three responses? the only way to get around what he said in each situation is to simply change HIS and the rest of the NTs meanings to tout your doctrine.If there is no harm in the expression, "I and the father are one "and I am in the father and he is in me" and these expressions are harmless like the blind man, where was there misunderstanding"There was no misunderstandin in the blind mans situation because they knew he was not claiming what Jesus was claiming.Did the blind man say, "the Father, Jesus and I are one"? Did the blind man ever say, "before you Pharisees WERE. IAM"You can keep being ignorant on this passage if you want but it does not help your caseYour grasping at straws to find a difference but have to change the whole meaning of IAM, to fit your doctrine. The Jewish leaders knew excally what he was implyingthe rest of the NT will not let you do this and you know it. IF YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND JESUS' WORDS IN THIER CONTEXT THE REST OF THE NT MAKES IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR WHAT THEIR MEANINFG IS. HAVE YOU FORGOTTEN ABOUT THE REST OF THE NT?Simply meet my challenge and provde me with an angel or man that meets these qualifications of deity ascribed to ChristMaybe you have a more rational explanation (than pegs) of why Jesus calls himself the First and the Last in the book of revelations, in the nearly the same paragraph after it is also ascribes it to GodYou see I am confronted with a challenge. I can believe what you say IAM means or I can believe what the rest of the NT says.Listen you Heritic, here is what it says the meaning of IAM is"IAM the first and the Last" RevelationsThis is the meaning of Jesus' words in the Gospel explained in Revelations. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?If you refuse to respond to the first part of this post, as I have now answered you three or four times, I will accept you as evasive or stupid, you decide.EAM Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

I told you to stop jumping to conclusions and just answer the question. You STILL keep jumping to conclusions. Is answering a question without your silly rhetoric that difficult? I NEVER said god told Moses he was actually god!!! What part do you not understand? I asked YOU a question. I asked you to explain it to me! I never once made any claim whatsover with the above scripture. NONE.All I asked is for you to explain it to me. What challenge???? All I did was join this debate by asking a question! You asked Peg this question, not me.God made Moses like god. You finally, in between all your assumptions and rudeness, stated he will "appear" as god.Well, what does that mean then? I'd be more than happy to address this if you could actually answer my question in detail. Wow. Another example of you saying I said something when I did nothing of the sort. I said, every verse in the gospels is flimsy EXCEPT that one. I did not say it was a clear cut example. Without the proper context, it appears to state Jesus is god. Peg covered this quite well. Jesus never calls himself "I am". Not once. Feel free to present said scripture. Son of god, son of man do not imply Jesus is god. Yes, they wanted to kill him, not for calling himself any of those names. So you're wrong on both accounts. Feel free again to present scripture that they wanted to kill him for calling himself for those reasons. You've jumped to conclusions once again. I reject all three that he was killed for those reasons. I also reject that all three means he was calling himself god. God gave Jesus the power to forgive sins. The power ultimately is still god.If I said a General can only give order to move against X and a Sergeant gives the order from the General, both actually gave the order. BUT...its the General who is ultimately in charge. ONLY the General can give the order, but he can give the power to another to pass the order along. Same applies for Jesus. God gave him the power (which the Bible clearly states over and over). Amazing, the answer is right in front of you and you ignore it. Regarding John 5:18: Did Jesus call himself god? No. Did the Jews accuse Jesus of being god? No. What did they accuse him of?Being equal to god. They did NOT accuse him of being god! What does Jesus say in response??? Not that he is god, but god GAVE him the power!This is another clear cut example of Trinitarians taking scripture, not understanding it, going in another direction, when the answer states the oppposite! Wrong. You STILL refuse to actually address the issue. The blind man, states "I am". Yet you admit he is not addresing himself as god. Yet when Jesus states "I am" apparently it MUST be god he is calling himself. Let alone the fact it makes no sense in light of the question."Before Abraham, god". How does this make any sense. If "I am" is the name of god, then that it the exact response Jesus made. Its a loaded question. Lets assume that no angel or man is equal to Christ. What exactly does that prove? Where did I ever state someone was equal to Jesus? No he doesnt.And for the fifth time (wonder why you keep ignoring this question, why didnt the High Priest and Council, the witnesses and the false witnesses accuse Jesus of being god?What did they accuse him of?

And you are admamant that something must be attached to IAM in John 8, so I give it to you in the form of "IAM the first and the last" and i explain that this is a further explanation of IAM, according to the scripture and your best answer is:"No its not" that is your best answer?First we have to attach another meaning to IAM, Now we have to attach another meaning to "IAM the first and the Last" to accomdate heritics doctrine. Where will it stop? IAM is not the name of God it is a title or designation. IAM is another way of saying God, so he did not say before Abraham was, God, he said before Abraham was IAMGoodness, we have to change the words again to accodate his doctrine. WHERE WILL IT STOP Does your story say that sergeant is also the General, ie, "IAM the first and the Last"? John 8 and in Revelations It means Moses is never called by himself, or God "The first and the Last" Only that he would be LIKE GOD to PHAROAHChrist, the scriptures and God call Christ the samething God is called, "the first and the Last'. It does not say he IS LIKE THE FIRST AND THE LAST. Do you see the difference?When you take the totalityof scripture into consideration you will come to the correct conclusionEAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.

Where did you address my question about where the Bible says that Michael the angel will come to dwell within the Christians ?As to your question, it is more important that they condemned Jesus for how He acted. Yes, they condemned Him for saying He was the Son of God. Yes, in spite of your protests, they would stone Him for saying He was the I AM.I think it is clear the Jesus acted as God / Son of God. And He pressed the opposers to explain how the Son of David could be called Lord by David. And various other passages which caused an accumulative reaction to Christ's deeds and ministry.The child born in Isaiah's prophecy was to be called Mighty God. If you do not call Him Mighty God, millions of others throughout history have done so. And the Son given in Isaiah 9:6 will be called Eternal Father. And Jesus told Philipp, when he asked to be shown the Father - "Have I been so long a time with you, and you have not known Me, Philip ? " (John 14:9) In this instance it would have been quite simple for Jesus to say "And you have not known [Him], Philip?"But He didn't say that. And John the Evangelist is careful to include Jesus's reply that left no separation between He and His Father: "Have I been so long a time with you, and you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; how is it that you say, Show us the Father ?" (John 14:9)This is important too, and not only what Jesus was condemned for by the opposers. They were mad with Him for many things.Jesus goes on to speak of the mutual indwelling of the Father in Him and He in the Father - "Do you not believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in Me? The words that I say to you, I do not speak from Myself, but the Father who abides in Me does His works." (v.10) Jesus could well have said something like this "Philip, didn't you read Isaiah 9:6 ? Don't you remember that it said that the child born would be called the Mighty God ? Don't you remember that the Son given would be called Eternal Father? How can you ask Me then to show you the Father? Do you mean after all this time you still don't know Me."What the Jews said at the trials of Jesus are important. But they are not the only things written which are important. And we do not base our Christology solely on what accusations were uttered at His trial.Jesus, and the New Testament is very careful to show that by the Son being God this does NOT mean that the Son was not also at that time a MAN. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Are you not the ones who are continuing the persecution of Jesus? You appear to still be fighting against Him.They had their reasons to oppose Him. You have your reasons to oppose Him.Sure you do. You oppose Him for saying that before Abraham came into being, He, Jesus, is proclaimed I AM.It seems that Jesus is still on trial in your court. You still want to try Him for saying that He was the First and the Last in Revelation 1:17. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Ah see that, everyone sees a little common ground somewhere along the way

There is plenty of common ground between the skeptics and atheists who haunt this Forum and the Jehovah's Witnesses. They both share the common ground of rejecting the Bible.As for you plea for simplicity, I don't think you can get simplier than the first chapter of John. The Word that was God was God. And the Word became flesh. (John 1:1,14) It could be that this is something you will not realize until the day you receive Christ. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.